> >
> > You now need to do a cast because Rafal thinks that an ID for a user
> should
> > be deprecated (however, it makes sense from the standpoint of using a
> > relational db and needing to do associations...thus, you have to do a
> nasty
> > cast...i hate casting).
> >
> > ((TurbineUser) data.getUser()).getIdAsInt()
> >
> > -jon
> >
As a lowly user I would have to say, "Please keep user id," I'm finding
this in the archives because I'm finding out that my beloved data.getUser().getID()
is gone :(. For the exact reason Jon mentions a very user-centric application
with many tables using TURBINE_USER as the base user information we don't
want to have to relate off of the UserName, and waste many characters of space.
What is the arguement for droping the userID (other than the fact that
there are two uniqe keys on TURBINE_USER table)?
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Search: <http://www.mail-archive.com/turbine%40list.working-dogs.com/>
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
